Develop reports on comments from Electronic Arts during a Morgan Stanley Technology, Media, and Telecom Conference stating that the company is so pleased with its forays into the world of microtransactions, that they are bringing the support for these in-house, and that "all" their future games will feature microtransactions. "We are building into all of our games the ability to pay for things along the way; to get to a higher level," said EA CFO Blake Jorgensen. "And consumers are enjoying and embracing that way of business."

Oh that's nice, I only buy ea games on deep discounts, used or on clearance. And your last game I just watched on YouTube. The prices I pay you can afford to make shitty games and I'll still look at them. Sim City seems on track to be a clearance purchase if not just an extended YouTube viewing.

Creston wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 10:52:BF3 and ME3 helped them register a ton of people, but few of those people use Origin for anything else. I 'use' it because I have to use it to run ME3. Other than that, it serves no purposes, same as that retarded Ubi thing. They will never overtake Steam. EA isn't willing to do what is necessary to overtake Steam. Plus, let's be honest, if they ever looked like serious competition, Valve/Steam can easily outspend them if necessary. Steam will never just sit still while someone else tries to take over the #1 spot.

Creston

I'd agree that Origin will never really compete with Steam. The goodwill Valve has and the great exposure they offer indie games are something I can't see EA ever matching. They clearly have no interest in a "price war". I believe Amazon is the only one who could overtake Steam, since they are larger, didn't just enter into this with a copycat product, and aren't hated by large amounts of the gaming population either.

BF3 will be my last EA game. Partly because of the business-centric rather than customer-centric focus, and partly because none of their games since BF3 have interested me, and even that didn't live up to the hype.

If some idiot wants to spend an additional $10 because he can't wait until mission 15 to get the robot suit then, hell, let him. Had Bethesda let you pay $10 to get the super armor it took like 2 hours to make to break Skyrim I'm sure plenty of jackasses would have paid it.

Creston wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 10:52:But how stupid is it that the games "have to be packed a certain way?" It's still a shitty, clunky solution.

They have a packing format so that they can push integrated games/dlc/patches, it makes sense. The Origin approach you mentioned is that way because they can't without doing it similarly to Steam. Both have pros and cons. Honestly I can't get too worked up about it. I actually kind of prefer to manage the location of things myself, its two right clicks with LinkShellExtension.

Oh, I don't care one way or the other. I have my Steam install on a dedicated gaming SSD, and when it's about to get full I just delete some stuff to make room, so for me the ability to switch the folders around is kinda pointless.

But Origin allowed it off the bat, and it wasn't until they started to do it that Steam finally, grudgingly, came up with a clunky way of doing it too.

Every time I see a "Your game files are being updated to a new format" message pop up in Steam, I just roll my eyes. Thanks for making me wait for something I don't use, Steam.

Creston wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 10:52:But how stupid is it that the games "have to be packed a certain way?" It's still a shitty, clunky solution.

They have a packing format so that they can push integrated games/dlc/patches, it makes sense. The Origin approach you mentioned is that way because they can't without doing it similarly to Steam. Both have pros and cons. Honestly I can't get too worked up about it. I actually kind of prefer to manage the location of things myself, its two right clicks with LinkShellExtension.

Verno wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 10:44:The games have to be packed a certain way to do this but the client does support it now. About half of my "now playing" library is installed to one SSD, the other half is on a hard drive.

But how stupid is it that the games "have to be packed a certain way?" It's still a shitty, clunky solution.

The community features in Origin are garbage and no one seems to use them so it's just a thing you have to have installed to use EA games rather than a functional, competitive client to Steam IMHO.

Look on the bright side. Because nobody uses it, it doesn't fragment the community either.

Of course this is how some people view Steam itself so *shrug*. Personally I get a lot of use out of Steams extra functionality and they have great deals on games, I've rarely seen any decent sales on the Origin store.

They have the Battlefield franchise for 75% off!!

It's a shame, EA has the resources to really make something out of it but as usual they are doing the bare minimum for that quarters financial statements.

Yeah, barely adequate / bare minimum are both apt monikers for EA.

Beamer wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 10:44:Honestly, "barely adequate" sounds like high praise for Origin.

It makes sense that it's behind Steam. Perfect sense. Also makes sense that no one wants to use it for that reason.

Origin? I don't see any EA games that can carry the weight HL2 did at launch.

BF3 and ME3 helped them register a ton of people, but few of those people use Origin for anything else. I 'use' it because I have to use it to run ME3. Other than that, it serves no purposes, same as that retarded Ubi thing. They will never overtake Steam. EA isn't willing to do what is necessary to overtake Steam. Plus, let's be honest, if they ever looked like serious competition, Valve/Steam can easily outspend them if necessary. Steam will never just sit still while someone else tries to take over the #1 spot.

Qbex . wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 09:43:One more reason to keep away from P.O.S. Orgin. I have to say even for a habitual gamer like me it's good going so far. So many alternatives, indie and kickstarters , good riddance EA I'm not going to miss you.

Pretty much this.

I haven't bought an EA game since Origin became a requirement.

There are actually a few things Origin does better than Steam:

- Ability to install games to whatever folder you want on a game by game basis. (STILL not possible in Steam, except for a few specific games.)- Ability to manage your DLC on a per-instance basis. Though there is no uninstall function for individual DLCs, you can delete the entire game, then prevent that one DLC you don't want from ever installing. Steam can't do this.- Ability to launch a game while DLC is downloading. Though you get a warning that it might cause instability, it WILL launch the game. Steam flatout refuses to launch a game while stuff is downloading for it.

There are also some pretty damn bad things about Origin:

- no backup ability. There are some work-arounds, but those all seem pretty heavily predicated on you installing Origin in the default folder and apparently won't work if you put it anywhere else. And in true developer-brilliance, the default folder is, of course, your C drive, because why WOULDN'T you want potentially millions of files cluttering up your fucking boot disk?

It makes sense that it's behind Steam. Perfect sense. Also makes sense that no one wants to use it for that reason. Digital Distribution needs to have some kind of value for people to want it. When Steam launched its only value was HL2, which was pretty much enough, as well as being the only option for digital distribution. It took it a long, long time to actually start adding value beyond that.

Origin? I don't see any EA games that can carry the weight HL2 did at launch (but I'm older, and can't imagine any game carrying that weight, even HL3, so maybe it's age more than anything.)If EA is willing to let it be a money sink for a while I have no trouble believing they'll find that value, but to start that value should just be legitimate value. Huge sales!

Creston wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 10:39:Ability to install games to whatever folder you want on a game by game basis. (STILL not possible in Steam, except for a few specific games.)

The games have to be packed a certain way to do this but the client does support it now. About half of my "now playing" library is installed to one SSD, the other half is on a hard drive.

The community features in Origin are garbage and no one seems to use them so it's just a thing you have to have installed to use EA games rather than a functional, competitive client to Steam IMHO. Of course this is how some people view Steam itself so *shrug*. Personally I get a lot of use out of Steams extra functionality and they have great deals on games, I've rarely seen any decent sales on the Origin store.

It's a shame, EA has the resources to really make something out of it but as usual they are doing the bare minimum for that quarters financial statements.

Qbex . wrote on Feb 27, 2013, 09:43:One more reason to keep away from P.O.S. Orgin. I have to say even for a habitual gamer like me it's good going so far. So many alternatives, indie and kickstarters , good riddance EA I'm not going to miss you.

Pretty much this.

I haven't bought an EA game since Origin became a requirement.

There are actually a few things Origin does better than Steam:

- Ability to install games to whatever folder you want on a game by game basis. (STILL not possible in Steam, except for a few specific games.)- Ability to manage your DLC on a per-instance basis. Though there is no uninstall function for individual DLCs, you can delete the entire game, then prevent that one DLC you don't want from ever installing. Steam can't do this.- Ability to launch a game while DLC is downloading. Though you get a warning that it might cause instability, it WILL launch the game. Steam flatout refuses to launch a game while stuff is downloading for it.

There are also some pretty damn bad things about Origin:

- no backup ability. There are some work-arounds, but those all seem pretty heavily predicated on you installing Origin in the default folder and apparently won't work if you put it anywhere else. And in true developer-brilliance, the default folder is, of course, your C drive, because why WOULDN'T you want potentially millions of files cluttering up your fucking boot disk?

I'm sure it's true. The Mass Effect "packs" sold so many copies that they funded FIVE free DLCs. And each of these DLCs came with pretty decent content, so I'm sure we're talking millions and millions of dollars worth of Spectre Packs being bought with money. (Shit, I saw enough evidence of it on the mp forum. There were several guys who had everything unlocked, including every single ultra-rare to level X. The amount of packs it takes to do that is staggering. When asked about it, one of those guys admitted he'd blown "a few thousand bucks" on buying packs. Sadly for him, he still couldn't play for shit.)

They will just become more and more pervasive with the popular "its just biz" excuse whenever someone criticizes it or suggests that its compromising creative design. Dead Space is a great example of what happens to a franchise that is hijacked by profit margins.

Sadly, people buy it. And not only do they buy it, but they buy that fucking micro-transaction bullshit.

Maybe we're all wrong, should EA really just need stick to sports titles and 10mil+ movers? Maybe that's best for everyone in the long run, I don't know. All I know is I'm kind of dreading what they have in store for the next Mirrors Edge, Dragon Age and Mass Effect games. Forced multiplayer, more DLC than actual game content (that day is coming) and so on.

So far I've not been disappointed by the amount of content Bioware puts into its games, and I've admittedly actually quite enjoyed the majority of their DLC. Yeah, there are some stinkers (Leviathan...), but there's also just really, REALLY good stuff (Leliana's Song was awesome, Lair of the Shadowbroker was incredible, etc.)

My biggest worry is that they will keep raising the prices on it. Both DLCs I mentioned above were 10 bucks, and the last two ME DLCs have been/will be $15. EA has no problem raising this to $20 (shit, EA would have no problem raising it to $5000) and since it never goes on sale, there's going to come a time when all the cool extra content is going to be too fucking expensive for my taste. (It's already teethering right on that edge with the $15 price point, to the extent that I wait until a lot of people say that it's actually worth it.)

"Dont like it, dont buy it" doesn't work if the industry can push itself to a large enough audience with marketing.

Well, it doesn't work if what you're trying to achieve is to make EA stop doing it, no. It works perfectly fine for you personally if you stop buying their games.

Also in before someone says this website hates EA yaddayadda

I never understand why you keep engaging his dumb troll ass. He's literally a parrot who just bleats the same fucking thing over and over again.